Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Maryland Transportation Authority v. King

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided June 10, 2002No. 17, Sept. Term, 2001Published

1ConcurrenceWilner, Judge

I concur in the result reached by the Court and in most of Judge Eldridge’s opinion. The one part of the opinion with which I take issue is the suggestion that there is some substantive difference between an abuse of discretion and an arbitrariness and capriciousness standard of review and the conclusion flowing from that suggestion that, unless the reviewing court declares the ruling or decision under consideration to be arbitrary or capricious, it may not reverse that ruling or decision even upon a finding that the ruling or decision (1) is prejudicial to the complainant, and (2) so exceeds…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. VolpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Kenneth E. Wildbur, Sr. v. Arco Chemical Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
  3. Jane Donaho v. Fmc Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, as Plan Administrator of the Fmc Long-Term Disability PlanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
  4. Heat & Control, Inc. v. Hester Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
  5. Genentech, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Company, and the Regents of the University of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API